This invention relates generally to carrying cases and more particularly to such cases suitable for holding elongate objects such as fishing rods, pool cues and the like.
It has heretofore been common practice to employ cylindrical tubes as carrying cases for fishing rods and similarly elongate items, the items being slid endwise into such a tube to load it and removed therefrom in the same endwise sliding manner. While such cylindrical tubes serve their purpose after a fashion, they have certain shortcomings. For example, it is generally inconvenient to insert items of considerable length, for example, six feet or more, into such tubes, or to remove the items therefrom. Also, fishing rods normally have fish line guides attached, which tend to become interlocked when more than one rod is fitted into a tube, making it necessary, in many cases, to slide all of the rods out together in order to select a particular one. Additionally, the presence of line guides and/or other attachments on fishing rods normally precludes the lining of tube interiors with padding or cushioning material since such attachments would have a tendency to damage the lining material as the rods are moved into and out of the tubes. Thus, such rods usually rattle when being transported in a tube container, which not only creates a noise nuisance, but can mar the rod surfaces. Finally, cylindrical tubes tend to roll about when being transported unless pains are taken to load them in such a way as to insure that they are wedged or otherwise secured against such movement.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,425,587 to Duross, Jr. discloses an elongate hinged container for fishing rods, or the like, that has certain advantages over cylindrical tubes, but does not overcome all of the above-mentioned shortcomings of those tubes. The Duross, Jr. container is formed from two "elongate container defining members", a first of which has a side wall "terminating in an engageable portion" and the second of which has a side wall "terminating in an engaging member". The "engaging member" of the second container defining member is engaged with the "engageable portion" of the first container defining member. The container opens and closes through the pivoting interaction of the "engaging member" of the second container defining member and the "engageable portion" of the first container defining member. Thus, the Duross, Jr. container has a hinge arrangement of conventional type in which pivoting movement between its container defining members takes place about a single hinge axis.
Any stress between the two container defining members of Duross, Jr. is transmitted directly from one to the other since their side walls are in direct contact throughout their lengths. In the case of those side walls meeting to form the above-described hinge, the stress transfer takes place at the hinge site. This results in vulnerability of the container to damage when it is subjected to undue stress, which can show up as wall or hinge deformation or fracture. The Duross, Jr. patent makes it clear that the hinged container defining members are formed of a rigid material, such as, for example, extruded aluminum or aluminum alloy, which, means that the container has little, if any, flexibility and must rely solely on the inherent strength and toughness of that material to resist such stress. In other words, the container has almost no shock absorbing ability and will therefore fracture or permanently deform when subjected to stress in excess of that which the inherent strength of the material of construction of its major components can withstand. Or, the parts of the hinge might separate before such damage occurs. In either case the container would be disabled, possibly beyond repair. Such inability to absorb physical stress beyond that which its walls alone can endure without damage is a disadvantage in a container for fishing rods because of the rough and abusive treatment such a container can be expected to receive under normal use conditions.
In addition to its obvious inability to absorb excessive stress without damage, the Duross, Jr. hinge arrangement, it seems to Applicants, leaves something to be desired in the way of dependable weather resistance over extended periods of time. Thus, this hinge arrangement, at least in preferred embodiments of the container, comprises interfitting parts of the same metal material from which the container walls are extruded, typically aluminum or an aluminum alloy, of relatively large surface area. Such a material might logically, we feel, be expected to lose its sealing effectiveness through corrosion and surface pitting upon prolonged exposure to harsh, corrosive environments, such as marine environments. By the same token, the hinge parts might be expected to lose some of their turning effectiveness as a result of such corrosion and even freeze up in extreme cases.
Because of the different configurations of their hinge side wall edges, the two container defining members of the Duross, Jr. container require separate extrusion, or other forming, steps. Another negative factor of present importance is an absence of any padding or cushioning means in the Duross, Jr. container.